|Publication number||US7509279 B2|
|Application number||US 11/279,951|
|Publication date||Mar 24, 2009|
|Filing date||Apr 17, 2006|
|Priority date||Jul 31, 2000|
|Also published as||US7031935, US20060190372|
|Publication number||11279951, 279951, US 7509279 B2, US 7509279B2, US-B2-7509279, US7509279 B2, US7509279B2|
|Inventors||Ashvin Bonafede Chhabra, Alexander G. Zaharoff|
|Original Assignee||Riskmetrics Group, Inc.|
|Export Citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Patent Citations (101), Non-Patent Citations (46), Referenced by (2), Classifications (10), Legal Events (4) |
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet|
Method and system for computing path dependent probabilities of attaining financial goals
US 7509279 B2
A method and system for computing the probability of attaining one or multiple financial goals is disclosed. Each goal is analyzed and reduced to a series of cash flows. A threshold criterion of success is established. A plurality of paths are generated. Each path is checked on the basis of the success criterion established earlier and those that do not meet the success criterion are considered failures. The probability of success is a function of the paths that are not failures.
1. A computer system of determining the probability that a financial goal expressed as a cash outflow will be met, comprising:
(a) a database including:
(i) a set of assets associated with a user, said assets associated with a market value; and
(ii) a criterion for success associated with said user, said criterion for success associated with a plurality of periods; and
(b) a programmed processor configured to:
(i) simulate a plurality of market scenarios on said assets, each said scenario adjusting said market value of said assets for each said period;
(ii) apply said criteria for success to each said scenario; and
(iii) calculate the probability said user will satisfy said associated criteria for success.
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to a method and system for utilizing a computer to generate financial advice, and more particularly to a method and system for determining statistical wealth projections and/or simultaneous probabilities of meeting defined sets of financial goals.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Rapid improvements in computer and communications technology, particularly developments of the Internet, have exponentially increased an individual's ability to access financial data. Contemporaneous changes in legal structures and financial vehicles have also increased the number of investment opportunities available to individuals. The vast amount of financial data and investment opportunities, however, have made it difficult for an investor to determine which investment vehicles will most likely enable the individual to meet his or her investment goals. Moreover, lifestyle and economic changes make it increasingly necessary to prepare for multiple investment goals, such as retirement, educational needs and home ownership. Thus, there exists a need for a method and system of generating financial advice which enables an individual to determine the likelihood that the individual's assets, future estimated savings, and investment plan will satisfy the individual's investment goals.
Traditional systems attempt to predict wealth and/or the likelihood of reaching a financial goal by computing the wealth of the user at some time horizon. One method of predicting future wealth assumes a “fixed” rate of return, and possibly some volatility factor, across time for various asset classes. A calculation is then made to determine a normal distribution of the user's terminal wealth. Multiple goals are handled by creating several phantom accounts, one for each goal. Each phantom account generating a different rate of return, often based on the investment horizon. This method, however, suffers from the drawback that most assets do not generate a “fixed” rate of return, and even those that provide so-called “fixed” returns (under common terminology) are not guaranteed.
Other systems simulate a variety of conditions and then determine the probability of success based on the percentage of wealth distribution being above the goal. For example, one system, offered by Financial Engines, Inc., allows a user to input information, including a desired retirement age and retirement income, a current age, a set of assets indicated as taxable or non-taxable, and future estimated savings. The system breaks down the user's portfolio to various asset classes, such as stocks, bonds and cash. The system then reportedly simulates economic variables over time, such as inflation, interest rates, and asset class returns, and traces thousands of paths the user's portfolio might take until the retirement age is met. After translating each scenario into an annuity and adding any other retirement benefits, the system looks at the terminal value of wealth attained and tallies the number of scenarios that do and do not reach the user's retirement goal (expressed in a dollar amount per year).
These systems, however, fail to simulate certain real life threshold concerns, and fail to optimize for multiple goals. One significant effect of this is to overstate the desirability of an aggressive portfolio in certain situations. For example, the mean of wealth at period T is typically calculated in analytic systems as eμT or e(μ+1/2σ 2 )T depending on the assumptions made. However, the number of paths that satisfy all intermediate goals and thresholds may decrease with increased volatility. Thus, for an individual having a current portfolio that is close to the individual's threshold, an aggressive, high volatility, portfolio may lead to a number of scenarios in which the portfolio value dips below the threshold—essentially causing a failure. These systems also fail to optimize for individual goals having multiple cash flows across time. Thus, there is a need for a multi-period, path dependent analysis system which optimizes analysis for multiple goals over multiple-periods of time and which accounts for intermediate threshold concerns.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The present invention addresses these and other deficiencies of the prior art by providing a system and methodology for computing the probability of attaining one or multiple goals. Each goal is analyzed and reduced to a series of probabilistic cash inflows or outflows. These cash flows are time ordered and combined to provide an integrated picture and to enable a computation that allows for the simultaneous achievement of multiple goals. A threshold criterion of success is established which may be supplied by the user or generated by the system, e.g. based on prudent financial planning such as always having a certain minimum amount of money. A plurality of paths, or samples are generated preferably using Monte Carlo sampling, to ascertain an accurate distribution of future wealth. Each path is checked (for a set of periods or time steps) on the basis of the success criterion established earlier, and those that do not meet the success criterion are considered failures. The probability of success is a function of the paths that are not failures.
Because the computation is path dependent, the system can account for the effect that cash spent in attaining a goal in the early years will have on the probability of reaching another goal in the later years. Losses in the early years adversely affect the probability of attaining goals set for the later years. The flexibility of the success criterion allows different users to have different criterion of success depending on their risk preferences.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES
FIG. 1A is a system block diagram showing the components of an integrated system utilizing the present invention;
FIG. 1B illustrates an example of a typical computer system upon which an embodiment of the invention may be implemented;
FIG. 2A shows a simulated time line of market values a user's portfolio may take over time;
FIGS. 2B and 2C show methods for calculating goal probabilities for simulated scenarios as a function of the paths that are not failures in accordance with the invention;
FIG. 2D is an example of a series of cash flows;
FIG. 2E shows a sample statistical wealth projection;
FIG. 2F shows a sample goal probability calculation in accordance with the invention;
FIG. 2G shows an example of multiple overlapping goals;
FIG. 2H shows a screen display of showing a plurality of cash inflows and outflows;
FIG. 3 is a high level flow chart showing an embodiment which divides assets as taxable or tax favored and categorizes assets by asset type;
FIG. 4 is a high level flow chart showing a method for collapsing assets into asset pools and calculating probabilities of meeting a defined set of goals in accordance with one embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 5 is a flow chart showing a method of collapsing assets into pools;
FIG. 6 is a flow chart showing a method of generating random returns;
FIG. 7 is a flow chart showing a method of performing Monte Carlo simulation;
FIG. 8A is a flow chart showing a method of calculating income tax in accordance with the present invention;
FIG. 8B is a flow chart showing a method of calculating cash flows for multiple asset pools in accordance with the present invention;
FIG. 8C is a flow chart showing a method of adjusting for realized capital gains;
FIG. 8D is a flow chart showing a method of adjusting for realized capital gains due to management turnover; and
FIG. 9 is a flow chart showing a method of computing goal probabilities in accordance with the present invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
FIG. 1A depicts the various modules and interfaces of an integrated system embodying the present invention. The system is preferably implemented as an Internet site accessible running on a financial server (55, FIG. 1B) accessible via the World-Wide-Web (57, FIG. 1B). A user will typically enter the site amongst other purposes to seek advice on one or more issues, for example, saving for retirement, a home purchase or a child's education. The user may access the site through a user workstation (58, FIG. 1B). The user is prompted to enter relevant information about their portfolio by a portfolio module 10. This information may include, for example, current regular income, savings, asset classes, expenses, and cash flows associated with their financial goals. The system may also prompt the user to input expectations for growth of those cash flows or, alternatively, the system will generate estimated cash flow growth.
The user's asset holdings are input to an advice engine 20 which converts the goals into a series of cash flows, simulates future wealth, analyzes the probabilities of meeting the multiple goals, and provides portfolio analytics. User information is stored on a database (56, FIG. 1B). If the user elects to execute one or more recommendations, a transaction order may be generated and forwarded to a brokerage module 30 which executes the order and reports back to the portfolio module 10 which adjusts the user's assets mix. Alternately, the user may elect to be recommended to a referral network 40 to communicate with a brokerage community. The user may also wish to have direct access to on-line research 50 while analyzing the portfolio.
FIG. 2A shows a simulated time line showing various paths or scenarios (P1, P2, P3, P4 & P5) a user's portfolio market value (x) may take under various simulated conditions over a time period (k=1 to n). FIG. 2A shows two goals, an intermediate goal (xgl) at time k=2 and a final goal (xgf) at time k=n. A goal may consist of multiple cash flows over multiple periods (not shown), such as, for example, paying for college tuition for a child. Five simulated paths are depicted (P1-P5). A threshold success criterion xs is also shown. When the simulated market value dips below this threshold the path is considered a failure. Each path starts off with an initial asset value and simulates the value across time periods.
As shown, the market value of each path is reduced by the value of the intermediate goal xgl at time k=2. Thus, the simulation takes into account the effect that cash spent in earlier years has on attaining goals in later years. Path P4 has a final value at period k=n which is less than the final goal xgf and would be considered a “failure.” Paths P1-P3 and P5 have final values x1n-x3n and x5n which are greater than the final goal xgf. However, paths P2, P3 and P5 dip below the success criteria at least one point along the time line and would also be considered “failures.” For example the market value of the path P3 dips below the success criteria xs at period k=n−4; the market value of path P2 actually goes below zero at period k=n−2; and P5 does not have sufficient funds to satisfy intermediate goal xgl at time k=2 without going below the success criterion. Thus, the only simulated path satisfying the intermediate and final goals (xgl and xgf), and success criterion (xs), is P1.
As noted above, a goal may consist of multiple cash flows. In an advantageous embodiment, the probability is calculated at the end of each period, but the probability, using the binary of failure/success at any time before, at the last cash flow period corresponding to the goal becomes that goal probability, i.e. it is the probability of achieving that goal subject to achieving all, or a chosen set of, the cash flows before it.
FIG. 2A also shows a distribution of wealth projections at period k=n. This represents the projected wealth of the user at the end of the simulation. In an advantageous embodiment, the distribution may be calculated at the end of each goal, e.g. k=2.
FIGS. 2B-2C show exemplary methods of calculating goal probabilities in accordance with the invention. FIG. 2B shows a binary method for calculating goal probabilities in which a path is assigned a goal probability of 1 if it satisfies all goals and the success criterion for each period, and 0 if it fails to satisfy every goal or the success criterion for every period. Thus, for the simulation shown in FIG. 2B, path P1 has a goal probability of 1. Paths P2-P5 are assigned goal probabilities of 0. Those probabilities may be averaged to give an overall probability of 1 in 5 of satisfying the intermediate and final goals and success criterion.
FIG. 2C shows an application of one type of decaying goal probability function with a limited “memory.” Each path is assigned a goal probability equal to (the sum (for i=0 to 3) of deltan−i/(i+1)2) divided by (1/1+1/4+1/9+1/16), where deltai is a function of whether the market value for the path at period (i) satisfies the success criteria. In the example shown, deltai equals 1 if the market value of period (i) satisfies the success criterion and 0 if it does not. Thus, the goal probability of path P1=1; P2=(1/1+1/4 +0/9+0/16)/(1/1+1/4+1/9+1/16); P3=1; and P4=(0/1+1/4+1/9+1/16)/(1/1+1/4+1/9+1/16). Those goal probabilities may be averaged.
Other mechanisms for assigning goal probabilities will be readily apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art based on the disclosure herein. For example, one may have a decaying function without a “memory.” One may define any path which can not satisfy a final and/or intermediate goal as having zero goal probability. One may assign different intermediate numbers depending upon whether a path fails to satisfy a success criterion, as compared to having negative wealth. As a further example, one may assign any of a number of types of delta functions.
FIGS. 2D, 2E and 2F show an exemplary series of cash flows, and a resulting wealth projection and goal probability, respectively. FIG. 2D shows a series of planned incoming cash flows of $150,000 for years 1-7, 9 and 10, and a series of outflow goals for years 8, 11-30. A simulated wealth projection is shown in FIG. 2E, based on an initial set of assets and the cash flows of FIG. 2D. In a preferred embodiment, the system displays the median wealth value, 17th percentile wealth value and 83rd percentile wealth value. As described below, the wealth projection values are preferably simulated using Monte Carlo simulation. The simulated market values are used to determine the probability that the user will achieve her financial goals (e.g. cash outflows for years 8, 11-30).
FIG. 2G shows an exemplary series of cash inflows 70, and three goals 71, 72 and 73. Goals 71 and 72 each consist of multiple-period cash flows. Goal 73 is a single cash flow that overlaps with goal 72. Success for multiple-period cash flow goals may be defined as meeting the cash flow needs for each period. Thus, for example, for a simulated path to satisfy goal 72 it would have to have sufficient funds to make cash outflows for each of the six periods.
FIG. 2H shows a plurality of cash inflows (regular income, retirement income, other income) and a plurality of cash outflows (living expenses and event driven expenses). FIG. 2H also shows the effect of taxes on the wealth projection.
With reference to FIG. 3, an overview of an advantageous embodiment which divides assets into taxable and tax favored classes and categorizes assets by asset group (e.g. large cap, small cap, international, biotech, high technology, etc.) is discussed.
The user inputs (step 60) the parameters for one or more financial goals into the system. This consists of one or more dollar amounts at specified time frames. These financial goals are converted to cash flows. The user next inputs (step 61) a portfolio of assets. These may be individually added or accessed from one or more links such as via the Web. These variables may include, for example, the market values of taxable and tax exempt assets, the leverage value for taxable and tax exempt assets, and the book value of taxable and tax exempt asset pools. In one advantageous embodiment, the system categorizes (step 62) each asset by the type of financial asset, such as international stock, small cap stock, large cap stock, cash, bonds, etc. This is designed to save computation time by treating similar assets similarly. Depending on the type of client (e.g. individual or institutional), assets may also be advantageously categorized as taxable or tax favored (step 63) (either tax exempt or tax deferred). Present and expected cash flows are inputted or generated (step 64). These include, for example, expected returns for taxable and tax exempt asset pools and individual assets. The cash flows are aggregated on a period by period basis (step 65). Criteria for success are defined (step 66).
Any number of different criteria of success can be established reflecting the different risk tolerances of the investor. “Absolute” thresholds have some arbitrary value, such as zero, $100,000 or −$100,000. “Relative” thresholds may be defined as some value which is a function of some variable such as inflation or current earnings. For example, a relative threshold could be six months future estimated living expenses, or a percentage of future estimated wages. Alternately, a multi-period success criterion may be used including, by way of example, falling below an arbitrary level or falling below some level for more than one period. This level may be allowed to vary over time. Success criteria may further be a function of leverage levels. Success criteria may further be defined as having “memory” or a “decaying memory.” For example, with an “absolute with memory” criterion, a path that dips below the threshold is considered a failure for all subsequent periods. Examples of decaying memory thresholds are described below.
The probability of achieving the goals is determined (step 67). Additionally, the system may plot out an expected distribution of wealth for each period.
With reference to FIG. 4, the process of collapsing assets into asset pools, and simulating probabilities of attaining goals, in accordance with one embodiment of the invention is described as follows:
- (step 100) collapse the given asset data into two or more pools (e.g. a taxable pool, a tax favored pool, or a concentrated positions pool);
- (step 200) generate random returns;
- (step 300) perform path dependent, multi-period Monte Carlo simulation using the above random return data for each of the two pools, to calculate net wealth for each period; and
- (step 400) determine future wealth and goal probabilities for each period, and generate the output statistics.
As noted above, other methods for simulating net wealth for each period may be used in practicing the invention.
With reference to FIG. 5, the process of collapsing assets (step 100) into multiple pools is preferably implemented as follows. All of the given assets in the portfolio are categorized either as taxable or tax deferred assets. All assets belonging to one category are collapsed into a single asset pool having a single expected return, volatility and yield. The process described below assumes a two pool system: a taxable pool and a tax favored pool. As noted above, the tax favored pool may comprise tax exempt and/or tax deferred assets. For the purposes of the description herein, the terms tax favored, tax deferred and tax exempt are used interchangeably, unless noted otherwise. Additional, and/or different, pools, such as a separate pool for one or more concentrated positions, may be used. The expected return, volatility and yield for the collapsed asset pool are calculated as follows:
Calculate (step 101) the leverage value for the tax and tax exempt pools. Leverage is the amount of money borrowed in connection with the portfolio. Leverage allows the portfolio to take negative values. In an advantageous embodiment, only one asset, such as U.S. cash, is allowed to have negative market value in each of the asset pools.
Convert (step 102) the annualized expected return and volatility of the asset pools into continuously compounded values. Calculate (step 103) the relative weights of taxable and tax favored pools. This may be calculated as a function of the sum of the market values of each asset pool. Calculate (step 104) the expected return of each pool. This may be calculated as the weighted mean of all the assets in each pool with positive market values.
The correlation of the pools is calculated (step 106) using a defined set of weight vectors (step 105). The management fee for the asset pools is calculated (step 107), preferably as the weighted (by market values) average of the management fee of the individual assets in that pool.
The yield for the asset pools is calculated (step 108) as the weighted (by market values) average of the individual asset yield values of the assets in that pool. This yield is annualized value.
The system calculates (step 109) the B/M ratio of the asset pool. This may be calculated as the ratio of the sum of market values of the assets to the sum of book values of the assets in that pool.
The management turnover for the tax favored pool is assumed to be zero and for taxable asset pool management turnover is estimated as the turnover for each asset class (step 110).
With reference to FIG. 6, a preferred method for generating random returns (step 200) and simulating multiple paths (step 300) is now described. Those returns are used to simulate correlated random walks for each pool. Two pools of uncorrelated Gaussian random vectors with zero mean and unit variance are generated (step 201), which are then transformed to reflect the mean variance and correlation of each pool. The required volatility and expected return values for each pool is calculated (step 203) based on the type, and concentration, of assets in the pool. The system then simulates (step 204) multiple paths, each of which is one realization of a period of time (k=1−n) that is consistent with the calculated volatility and expected return.
With reference to FIG. 7, the preferred method of utilizing a path dependent, multi-period Monte Carlo simulation (step 300) is described. As noted above, alternate simulation techniques may be used in practicing the invention. Thus, the methodology described herein may be used with any asset projection system, as long as wealth value for each period is known for each scenario. For example, instead of a Monte Carlo technique, the system may vary individual parameters, such as equity (high vs. low return) or inflation (high vs. low).
The purpose of simulation step (step 300) is to track how much money each pool would have. In the period-by-period simulation, the wealth computation is based on inflows and outflows, and the amount in each pool. The system preferably tracks how much tax a user would have to pay, how many assets would have to be liquidated, etc.
In order to save computation time, an advantageous embodiment further groups assets into multiple asset classes or pools such as large cap, small cap, etc. However, the invention could be practical using a single class or no classes, in which case assets are examined individually.
The capital gains rate is calculated (step 301) as the expected (treated) return rate−yield. Net income after income taxes and management fees is calculated (step 302). With reference to FIG. 8A, a preferred method for performing income tax calculations is described. Income tax is calculated for the taxable asset pool (step 701). Income from the taxable asset pool is calculated (step 702) as the initial market value*(the yield from taxable asset*(1−tax rate)−the management fee). Accumulated capital gains are initialized (step 702) as zero for the first year and as the initial accumulated capital gains for other periods. Net return after income tax and management fee is calculated (step 704) as rate of return minus income taxes/initial mkt value−management fee.
For the tax exempt pool, income tax is set (step 705) to zero. Income from the tax exempt asset pool is calculated (706) as the initial market value*(the yield from tax exempt asset−the management fee). Accumulated capital gains for the tax exempt asset pool is initialized (step 707). Net return after income tax and management fee is calculated (step 708) as the rate of return−income taxes/initial mkt value−the management fee.
With continued reference to FIG. 7, cash flows for the taxable and non-taxable pools are calculated (step 303). With reference to FIG. 8B, a preferred method for performing cash flow calculations is described. Cash outflow from the taxable asset pool is the maximum amount of cash outflow that is possible without making its market value negative, or the actual cash outflow required if this amount is smaller than the maximum outflow that is allowed.
For the taxable pool, total cash flow required is calculated (step 720) as cash inflow into the taxable asset pool−cash outflow from the taxable pool. If this value is negative (step 721), then the maximum amount of cash that can be taken out from the taxable pools is calculated (step 722).
For the tax exempt pool, if all the cash outflow required can be accommodated from the taxable pool, cash flow is equal to the cash inflow into the tax exempt pool for that period (step 723). Otherwise cash outflow for the tax exempt pool is equal to this remaining amount (step 721).
With continued reference to FIG. 7, realized capital gains after cash flow are calculated (step 304). With reference to FIG. 8C a preferred method of calculating realized capital gains, and adjusting other variables, is described. For the taxable asset pool, realized capital gains due to cash flow are computed (step 720), market value after personal cash flow is adjusted (step 731), book value after personal cash flow is adjusted (step 732), B/M ratio after personal cash flow is adjusted (step 733), capital gains taxes after cash flow is adjusted (step 734), return after cash flow is adjusted (step 735), and accumulated realized capital gains after cash flow is adjusted (step 736).
For the tax exempt pool, only market value is of interest. Market value after cash flow for the tax exempt pool is adjusted (step 737). Capital gains after cash flow, and return after cash flow, are set.
With continued reference to FIG. 7, realized capital gains due to management turnover are calculated (step 305). With reference to FIG. 8D a preferred method for performing this calculation and adjusting other variables is described.
For the taxable pool, realized capital gains due to management turnover is calculated (step 740) as (1−book/market ratio after client cash flow)*market value after cash flow*managing turnover; market value after managing turnover is adjusted (step 741) as the market value after clients cash flow−capital gains tax paid; book value after management turnover is adjusted (step 742) as the book value after cash flow+realized capital gain after cash flow; B/M ratio is adjusted (step 743); capital gains taxes (step 744), return is adjusted (step 745), and accumulated capital gains (step 746) are adjusted.
Since managing turnover for the tax exempt pool is taken as zero, the above calculations are not necessary for the tax exempt pool.
With continued reference to FIG. 7, net wealth for the period is calculated (step 306). For the case when there is no leverage, net worth of the portfolio during period (k) is the sum of the market value after management turnover for the taxable assets plus the market value after the client's personal cash flow for the tax exempt pool (since the management turnover for the tax exempt pool is taken as zero). If the net wealth for a period is negative, then for the subsequent periods the portfolio is not evolved using the random returns. Instead, the market values are set to zero and the net wealth is added to the leverage.
In the case where there is leverage, the leverage is evolved at a multiple of the US cash return rate. This process is continued until the total leverage plus the total cash flow turns positive. When this is happens, the cash flows are reduced by the leverage amount, the leverage value is set to zero and the portfolio is evolved normally. Thus, for the case where there is leverage, net wealth for the period is calculated as the market value after managing turnover for the taxable pool, plus market value after the client's personal cash flow for the tax exempt pool, plus the total leverage for the period.
With reference back to FIG. 4, after performing Monte Carlo simulation to determine net worth for each period (k), goal probability for each period is computed. In the preferred embodiment goal probability is computed as follows. First, a delta function for each period (k) (step 801) for each observation (j) (step 802) is computed (step 803). Preferably the delta function is equal to one if net worth satisfies the success criterion and zero if not.
Next, the goal probability for each period (k), for each observation (j), is calculated (step 804) as a function of whether the client met the success criterion for prior periods (k-i). In the following advantageous formula, a decaying four year memory for negative net worth paths is used. This version does not “penalize” a client's current goal probabilities (i.e., decrease the calculated probability that the client will achieve goals) for having had a negative net worth more than four years ago. As will be apparent to those of skill in the art, other functions or values may be used.
Goal probability for a period (k) is averaged (step 805) over a number of observations (j). Preferably, this is over n=400 observations. This may be increased, for concentrated positions, or if the volatility is high. This may be expressed as:
Although the present invention was discussed in terms of certain preferred embodiments, the description is not limited to such embodiments. Rather, the invention includes other embodiments including those apparent to a person of ordinary skill in the art. Thus, the scope of the invention should not be limited by the preceding description but should be ascertained by reference to the claims that follow.
|Cited Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US3634669||Jul 16, 1969||Jan 11, 1972||Aero Flow Dynamics Inc||Analog computation of insurance and investment quantities|
|US4254474||Aug 2, 1979||Mar 3, 1981||Nestor Associates||Information processing system using threshold passive modification|
|US4346442||Jul 29, 1980||Aug 24, 1982||Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated||Securities brokerage-cash management system|
|US4355372||Dec 24, 1980||Oct 19, 1982||Npd Research Inc.||Market survey data collection method|
|US4376978||Oct 22, 1980||Mar 15, 1983||Merrill Lynch Pierce, Fenner & Smith||Securities brokerage-cash management system|
|US4597046||Sep 30, 1982||Jun 24, 1986||Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith||Securities brokerage-cash management system obviating float costs by anticipatory liquidation of short term assets|
|US4598367||Nov 9, 1983||Jul 1, 1986||Financial Design Systems, Inc.||Financial quotation system using synthesized speech|
|US4642768||Mar 8, 1984||Feb 10, 1987||Roberts Peter A||Methods and apparatus for funding future liability of uncertain cost|
|US4674042||Apr 2, 1985||Jun 16, 1987||International Business Machines Corp.||Editing business charts|
|US4674044||Jan 30, 1985||Jun 16, 1987||Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.||Automated securities trading system|
|US4736294||Jun 23, 1987||Apr 5, 1988||The Royal Bank Of Canada||Data processing methods and apparatus for managing vehicle financing|
|US4739478||Sep 26, 1986||Apr 19, 1988||Lazard Freres & Co.||Methods and apparatus for restructuring debt obligations|
|US4760604||Sep 12, 1985||Jul 26, 1988||Nestor, Inc.||Parallel, multi-unit, adaptive, nonlinear pattern class separator and identifier|
|US4774663||Nov 21, 1983||Sep 27, 1988||Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated||Securities brokerage-cash management system with short term investment proceeds allotted among multiple accounts|
|US4831526||Apr 22, 1986||May 16, 1989||The Chubb Corporation||Computerized insurance premium quote request and policy issuance system|
|US4859187||Jul 11, 1986||Aug 22, 1989||Peterson Richard E||Database management enhancement device|
|US4866634||Aug 10, 1987||Sep 12, 1989||Syntelligence||Data-driven, functional expert system shell|
|US4897811||Jan 19, 1988||Jan 30, 1990||Nestor, Inc.||N-dimensional coulomb neural network which provides for cumulative learning of internal representations|
|US4972504||Mar 20, 1990||Nov 20, 1990||A. C. Nielsen Company||Marketing research system and method for obtaining retail data on a real time basis|
|US5041972||Apr 15, 1988||Aug 20, 1991||Frost W Alan||Method of measuring and evaluating consumer response for the development of consumer products|
|US5093907||Sep 25, 1989||Mar 3, 1992||Axa Corporation||Graphic file directory and spreadsheet|
|US5220500||Sep 19, 1989||Jun 15, 1993||Batterymarch Investment System||Financial management system|
|US5227874||Oct 15, 1991||Jul 13, 1993||Kohorn H Von||Method for measuring the effectiveness of stimuli on decisions of shoppers|
|US5231571||Aug 14, 1990||Jul 27, 1993||Personal Financial Assistant, Inc.||Personal financial assistant computer method|
|US5245535||Apr 5, 1991||Sep 14, 1993||Citibank, N.A.||System for demonstrating financial concepts and displaying financial data|
|US5278451||Sep 30, 1991||Jan 11, 1994||Mitsubishi Denki Kabushiki Kaisha||Semiconductor device sealed with mold resin|
|US5297032||Feb 1, 1991||Mar 22, 1994||Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated||Securities trading workstation|
|US5321933||Mar 1, 1993||Jun 21, 1994||Alfill Getranketechnik Gmbh||Method of and apparatus for applying labels to containers|
|US5381470||May 28, 1991||Jan 10, 1995||Davox Corporation||Supervisory management center with parameter testing and alerts|
|US5396621||May 10, 1991||Mar 7, 1995||Claris Corporation||Sorting a table by rows or columns in response to interactive prompting with a dialog box graphical icon|
|US5444844||Sep 8, 1994||Aug 22, 1995||Nsk Ltd.||Figure drawing apparatus and inventory purchasing system using the same|
|US5481647||Sep 21, 1993||Jan 2, 1996||Raff Enterprises, Inc.||User adaptable expert system|
|US5490060||Nov 13, 1990||Feb 6, 1996||Information Resources, Inc.||Passive data collection system for market research data|
|US5502805||Jun 16, 1993||Mar 26, 1996||Borland International, Inc.||System and methods for improved spreadsheet interface with user-familiar objects|
|US5523942||Mar 31, 1994||Jun 4, 1996||New England Mutual Life Insurance Company||Design grid for inputting insurance and investment product information in a computer system|
|US5550734||Dec 23, 1993||Aug 27, 1996||The Pharmacy Fund, Inc.||Computerized healthcare accounts receivable purchasing collections securitization and management system|
|US5551021||Jul 25, 1994||Aug 27, 1996||Olympus Optical Co., Ltd.||Image storing managing apparatus and method for retreiving and displaying merchandise and customer specific sales information|
|US5583778||Sep 21, 1994||Dec 10, 1996||Instasearch Corp.||Computer method for collecting on judgments|
|US5592590||Jul 1, 1994||Jan 7, 1997||General Electric Company||Method for efficiently detecting covered rules in a knowledge base|
|US5603025||Jul 29, 1994||Feb 11, 1997||Borland International, Inc.||Methods for hypertext reporting in a relational database management system|
|US5606496||May 16, 1995||Feb 25, 1997||Aegis Technologies, Inc.||Personal assistant computer method|
|US5611052||Nov 1, 1993||Mar 11, 1997||The Golden 1 Credit Union||Lender direct credit evaluation and loan processing system|
|US5615109||May 24, 1995||Mar 25, 1997||Eder; Jeff||Method of and system for generating feasible, profit maximizing requisition sets|
|US5615341||May 8, 1995||Mar 25, 1997||International Business Machines Corporation||System and method for mining generalized association rules in databases|
|US5623591||Sep 10, 1993||Apr 22, 1997||Borland International, Inc.||System and methods for building spreadsheet applications|
|US5644727||Dec 6, 1994||Jul 1, 1997||Proprietary Financial Products, Inc.||System for the operation and management of one or more financial accounts through the use of a digital communication and computation system for exchange, investment and borrowing|
|US5649116||Mar 30, 1995||Jul 15, 1997||Servantis Systems, Inc.||Integrated decision management system|
|US5655085||Mar 18, 1994||Aug 5, 1997||The Ryan Evalulife Systems, Inc.||Computer system for automated comparing of universal life insurance policies based on selectable criteria|
|US5657437||Dec 10, 1993||Aug 12, 1997||Lucent Technologies Inc.||Data processing apparatus and method including proportional updating of data|
|US5657460||Apr 11, 1995||Aug 12, 1997||Data View, Inc.||System and method for storing and displaying data|
|US5664127||Feb 28, 1996||Sep 2, 1997||Borland International, Inc.||System and methods for improved spreadsheet interface with user-familiar objects|
|US5671363||Jun 7, 1995||Sep 23, 1997||Merril Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc.||Private stock option account control and exercise system|
|US5675746||Sep 30, 1992||Oct 7, 1997||Marshall; Paul S.||Virtual reality generator for use with financial information|
|US5689650||Feb 23, 1995||Nov 18, 1997||Mcclelland; Glenn B.||Community reinvestment act network|
|US5717865||Sep 25, 1995||Feb 10, 1998||Stratmann; William C.||Method for assisting individuals in decision making processes|
|US5721847||Feb 3, 1997||Feb 24, 1998||Microsoft Corporation||Method and system for linking controls with cells of a spreadsheet|
|US5727161||Sep 16, 1994||Mar 10, 1998||Planscan, Llc||Method and apparatus for graphic analysis of variation of economic plans|
|US5732397||Mar 16, 1992||Mar 24, 1998||Lincoln National Risk Management, Inc.||Automated decision-making arrangement|
|US5758328||Feb 22, 1996||May 26, 1998||Giovannoli; Joseph||Computerized quotation system and method|
|US5764923||Nov 22, 1995||Jun 9, 1998||Access Health, Inc.||Medical network management system and process|
|US5765144||Jun 24, 1996||Jun 9, 1998||Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.||System for selecting liability products and preparing applications therefor|
|US5768158||Dec 8, 1995||Jun 16, 1998||Inventure America Inc.||Computer-based system and method for data processing|
|US5774878||Jun 27, 1994||Jun 30, 1998||Marshall; Paul Steven||Virtual reality generator for use with financial information|
|US5774883||May 25, 1995||Jun 30, 1998||Andersen; Lloyd R.||Method for selecting a seller's most profitable financing program|
|US5799286||Jun 7, 1995||Aug 25, 1998||Electronic Data Systems Corporation||Automated activity-based management system|
|US5802502||Apr 26, 1994||Sep 1, 1998||British Telecommunications Public Limited Company||System for selective communication connection based on transaction pricing signals|
|US5812988 *||Apr 6, 1995||Sep 22, 1998||Investments Analytic, Inc.||Method and system for jointly estimating cash flows, simulated returns, risk measures and present values for a plurality of assets|
|US5819237||Feb 13, 1996||Oct 6, 1998||Financial Engineering Associates, Inc.||System and method for determination of incremental value at risk for securities trading|
|US5842178||Jan 30, 1998||Nov 24, 1998||Giovannoli; Joseph||Computerized quotation system and method|
|US5848400||Jul 1, 1996||Dec 8, 1998||Sun Microsystems, Inc.||Electronic check exchange, clearing and settlement system|
|US5852811||Jul 25, 1994||Dec 22, 1998||Proprietary Financial Products, Inc.||Method for managing financial accounts by a preferred allocation of funds among accounts|
|US5870721||Oct 15, 1996||Feb 9, 1999||Affinity Technology Group, Inc.||System and method for real time loan approval|
|US5873096||Oct 8, 1997||Feb 16, 1999||Siebel Systems, Inc.||Method of maintaining a network of partially replicated database system|
|US5875437||Apr 15, 1997||Feb 23, 1999||Proprietary Financial Products, Inc.||System for the operation and management of one or more financial accounts through the use of a digital communication and computation system for exchange, investment and borrowing|
|US5878258||May 6, 1996||Mar 2, 1999||Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith||Seamless application interface manager|
|US5878403||Sep 12, 1995||Mar 2, 1999||Cmsi||Computer implemented automated credit application analysis and decision routing system|
|US5913202||Jun 13, 1997||Jun 15, 1999||Fujitsu Limited||Financial information intermediary system|
|US5918217||Dec 10, 1997||Jun 29, 1999||Financial Engines, Inc.||User interface for a financial advisory system|
|US5920848||Jan 22, 1998||Jul 6, 1999||Citibank, N.A.||Method and system for using intelligent agents for financial transactions, services, accounting, and advice|
|US5930775||Jan 14, 1997||Jul 27, 1999||Freddie Mac||Method and apparatus for determining an optimal investment plan for distressed residential real estate loans|
|US5940811||Oct 15, 1996||Aug 17, 1999||Affinity Technology Group, Inc.||Closed loop financial transaction method and apparatus|
|US5940812||Aug 19, 1997||Aug 17, 1999||Loanmarket Resources, L.L.C.||Apparatus and method for automatically matching a best available loan to a potential borrower via global telecommunications network|
|US5950175||Oct 14, 1994||Sep 7, 1999||Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated||System for managing real estate SWAP accounts|
|US5963953||Mar 30, 1998||Oct 5, 1999||Siebel Systems, Inc.||Method, and system for product configuration|
|US5970467||Jul 31, 1997||Oct 19, 1999||Enviro Ec Ag||Accurate market survey collection method|
|US5974396||Jul 19, 1996||Oct 26, 1999||Moore Business Forms, Inc.||Method and system for gathering and analyzing consumer purchasing information based on product and consumer clustering relationships|
|US5978779||Nov 14, 1997||Nov 2, 1999||Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith||Distributed architecture utility|
|US5983206||Jun 30, 1997||Nov 9, 1999||Oppenheimer; Robert H.||Computer system and computer-implemented process for implementing a mortgage partnership|
|US5987434||Jun 10, 1996||Nov 16, 1999||Libman; Richard Marc||Apparatus and method for transacting marketing and sales of financial products|
|US5991741||Feb 21, 1997||Nov 23, 1999||Fox River Holdings, L.L.C.||In$ite: a finance analysis model for education|
|US5995942||Mar 13, 1996||Nov 30, 1999||Tactical Retailing Solutions||Store-level marketing system|
|US5999907||Dec 6, 1993||Dec 7, 1999||Donner; Irah H.||Intellectual property audit system|
|US6008817||Dec 31, 1997||Dec 28, 1999||Comparative Visual Assessments, Inc.||Comparative visual assessment system and method|
|US6009415||Dec 16, 1991||Dec 28, 1999||The Harrison Company, Llc||Data processing technique for scoring bank customer relationships and awarding incentive rewards|
|US6018722||Jun 19, 1997||Jan 25, 2000||Aexpert Advisory, Inc.||S.E.C. registered individual account investment advisor expert system|
|US6021397||Dec 2, 1997||Feb 1, 2000||Financial Engines, Inc.||Financial advisory system|
|US6026370||Aug 28, 1997||Feb 15, 2000||Catalina Marketing International, Inc.||Method and apparatus for generating purchase incentive mailing based on prior purchase history|
|US6029139||Jan 28, 1998||Feb 22, 2000||Ncr Corporation||Method and apparatus for optimizing promotional sale of products based upon historical data|
|US6029195||Dec 5, 1997||Feb 22, 2000||Herz; Frederick S. M.||System for customized electronic identification of desirable objects|
|US6032125||Oct 22, 1997||Feb 29, 2000||Fujitsu Limited||Demand forecasting method, demand forecasting system, and recording medium|
|US6055517 *||Jan 30, 1998||Apr 25, 2000||Efi Actuaries||Method of determining optimal asset allocation utilizing asset cash flow simulation|
|1||Armstrong, Fund of Funds: Perfect Solution or Dangerous Shortcut?, Investor Solutions, Inc., www.investorsolutions.com, printed Jul. 24, 2002.|
|2||Asch, How the RMA/Fair Isaac credit-scoring model was built, Journal of Commercial Lending, vol. 77, No. 10, Jun. 1995, pp. 10-16.|
|3||At Your Request, www.wingspanbank.com, Sep. 28, 1999.|
|4||Bogle, Mutual Funds at the Millennium: Fund Directors and Fund Myths, The Vanguard Group to the '40 Act Institute of PLI (Practicing Law Institute), New York, NY, May 15, 2000, 15 pages.|
|5||Buchner et al., HotDoc: a flexible framework for spatial composition, Visual Languages, 1997, Proceedings, 1997 IEEE Sympsium, Abstract, Sep. 23-26, 1997, pp. 92-99.|
|6||Carey, The Sub-Prime Credit Market: Identifying Good Risks for Unsecured Cards, Credit World, vol. 85, No. 1, Sep. 1996, pp. 13-15.|
|7||Chi et al., Principles for information visualization spreadsheets; Computer Graphics and Applications; IEEE; vol. 18; Issue 4; Abstract, Jul./Aug. 1998, pp. 92-99.|
|8||Credit Scoring New Markets, Bank Technology News, vol. 9, No. 7, Jul. 1996, p. 1.|
|9||CSU/DSU (Channel Service Unit/Data Service Unit), CTI (Computer-Telephony Integration), pp. 208-210.|
|10||Cumby et al., Evaluating the Performance of International Mutual Funds, The Journal of Finance, vol. 45, No. 2, Jun. 1990, pp. 497-521.|
|11||Davenport et al., Numbers-a medium that counts [spreadsheet software]; Computer Graphics and Applications; IEEE; vol. 11; Issue 4; Abstract, Jul. 1991, pp. 39-44.|
|12||Derivatives Primer, CEIBA, Association for Financial Professionals, Committee on Investment of Employee Benefits Assets, Dec. 2001.|
|13||FreeMarkets, printed on Apr. 26, 1999.|
|14||Friedland, Credit Scoring Digs Deeper into Data, Credit World, vol. 84, No. 5, May 1996, pp. 19-23.|
|15||Gottfried et al., Graphical definitions: making spreadsheets visual through direct manipulation and gestures, Visual Languages, 1997, Proceedings, 1997 IEEE Sympsium on, Sep. 23-26, 1997, pp. 246-253, Abstract.|
|16||GS-Calc 126.96.36.199.; JPS Development; http://download.com, printed Sep. 3, 2003.|
|17||Hedge Fund Primer About Fund of Funds, Links Securities LLC, www.hedgefund.net/prime-fof.php3, 2002, 2 pages.|
|18||Hedge Fund Primer-The Basics, KSP Capital Management LLC, firstname.lastname@example.org, printed Jul. 24, 2002, 18 pages.|
|19||Hickman, Using Software to Soften Big-Time Competition, Bank Systems and Technology, vol. 31, No. 8, Jun. 1994, pp. 38-40.|
|20||Huddling With William Bernstein: Small Town Doctor, Investing Pro.|
|21||Internet, Lending Tree, Mortgage Apply Online in Minutes, www.lendingtree.com, 7 pages, printed Feb. 1, 1999.|
|22||Jameson, Expanding Risk Management Strategies: Key to Future Survival, Credit World, vol. 84, No. 5, May 1996, pp. 16-18.|
|23||Kneis, Hedge Fund Strategies: A Primer, Canadianhedgewatch, p. 3.|
|24||Makuch, Managing Consumer Credit Delinquency in the US Economy: A Multi-Billion Dollar Management Science Application, Interfaces, Feb. 1992, pp. 90-109.|
|25||Markese, Can You Trust Mutual Fund Rankings?, Consumers' Research Magazine, vol. 76, No. 10, Research Library, Oct. 1993, p. 20.|
|26||McLaughlin, Tapping Web to Search for Right Fund-FundProfiler Speeds Search, Boston Herald, Boston, MA, Dec. 16, 1999, p. 70.|
|27||Meredith, Internet bank moves closer to virtual reality, USA Today, May 5, 1995.|
|28||Opportunity Knocks at Scoring's Door, Collection and Credit Risk, vol. 2, No. 4, Apr. 1997, p. 53.|
|29||Portner, There Must be a Better Way, Mortgage Banking, vol. 53, No. 2, Nov. 1, 1992, pp. 12-22.|
|30||Pourmokhtar, A Hedge Fund Primer Version 0.1, www.emf.net/?farzin/hedgefund.html, printed Jul. 24, 2002, 5 pages.|
|31||Primer: Derivatives Instruments, Derivatives Study Center, www.econstrat.org/dscinstruments.htm, printed Jul. 24, 2002, 8 pages.|
|32||Product Data Integration Technologies, Inc., Step Integratin Authors, printed on Apr. 26, 1999.|
|33||Quinn, Credit Card Issuers Keeping a Closer Watch on How You Pay Bills, Washington Post, Staying Ahead, Business Section P6, Apr. 25, 1988, 1 page.|
|34||Roger et al., A Credit Scoring Model to Evaluate the Credit Worthiness of Credit Card Applicants, Developments in Marketing Science, vol. 5, 1982.|
|35||Snyder et al., Indentifying design requirements using analysis structures, Aerospace and Electronics Conference, 1991, NAECON, 1991, vol. 2, Abstract, May 20-24, 1991, pp. 786-792.|
|36||Spirer, When Bad Credit Behavior Becomes the Norm, Credit World, vol. 85, Iss. 6, Jul./Aug. 1997, p. 18.|
|37||Spoerri, Visual tools for information retrieval; Visual Languages; 1993; Proceedings; 1993 IEEE Symposium on; pp. 160-168; Abstract.|
|38||Spreadsheet Mapper; www.panopticon.com., printed Oct. 1, 2003.|
|39||Stolte et al., Polaris: a system for query, analysis, and visualization of multidimensional relational databases; Visualization and Computer Graphics; IEEE Transactions on; vol. 8; Issue 1; Abstract, Jan./Mar. 2002, pp. 52-65.|
|40||Storms, Phillip, Using Mortgage Credit to Achieve Client Objectives, Journal of Financial Planning, ISSN/ISBN: 10403981, Proquest Document ID: 10403981, vol. 9, Issue 5, 9 pages, Oct. 1996.|
|41||Storms, Phillip, Using Mortgage Credit to Achieve Client Objectives, Journal of Financial Planning, ISSN/ISBN: 10403981; Proquest document ID:10403981; Denver: vol. 9; Issue 5; 9 pages, Oct. 1996.|
|42||Sullivan, Scoring Borrower Risk, Mortage Banking, vol. 55, No. 2, Nov. 1994, pp. 94-98.|
|43||Taylor et al., Card Issuers Turn to Scoring as They Face Increasing Risk, Financial Services Report, vol. 8, No. 15, Jul. 24, 1991, p. 1.|
|44||TCS 4.20; Telsys sas; http://download.com, printed Sep. 30, 2003.|
|45||Trading and Capital-Markets Activities Manual, Instrument Profiles: Structured Notes, Federal Reserve System, The Turin Group, www.toerien.com/books/manual/4040.htm, printed Jul. 24, 2002, 14 pages.|
|46||Why A Fund of Funds?, Altegris Investments, www.managedinvestments.com/hedge-fund-of-funds, printed Jul. 24, 2002.|
|Citing Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US7904362 *||Nov 6, 2007||Mar 8, 2011||United Services Automobile Association||Systems and methods for implementing a financial plan with regard to expenses|
|US8533092 *||Mar 30, 2012||Sep 10, 2013||Fat Donkey, Inc.||Financial evaluation process|
|Sep 24, 2012||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 4
|Jun 4, 2010||AS||Assignment|
Effective date: 20100601
Owner name: MORGAN STANLEY & CO. INCORPORATED, AS COLLATERAL A
Free format text: SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNORS:MSCI INC.;BARRA, INC.;FINANCIAL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:24483/348
Free format text: SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNORS:MSCI INC.;BARRA, INC.;FINANCIAL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:024483/0348
|Jan 22, 2009||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: RISKMETRICS GROUP, INC., NEW YORK
Free format text: STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:J.P.MORGAN ADVISORY SERVICES, INC.;REEL/FRAME:022138/0172
Effective date: 20030331
|Jan 21, 2009||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: RISKMETRICS GROUP, INC., NEW YORK
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT AND LICENSE AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:JPMORGAN CHASE BANK;REEL/FRAME:022125/0397
Effective date: 20040614